Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 929

1 members and 928 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,945
Threads: 249,145
Posts: 2,572,376
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, SONOMANOODLES
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Threaded View

  1. #5
    Apprentice SPAM Janitor MarkS's Avatar
    Join Date
    07-22-2005
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    6,209
    Thanks
    1,535
    Thanked 2,678 Times in 1,596 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Images: 3
    I'm one of those who's opinion is that they're the same mutation. I see this as the whole lesser VS butter issue or the Phantom VS Mystic issue all over again. It used to be for a time that butters were more expensive than lessers so naturally those who had butters were the ones claiming that they were a completely different mutation. From my viewpoint, that looks to be the same thing that is happening to the calico VS sugar debate with sugars currently being the more desirable of the two. Remember that the normal you breed it to is just as important as the morph itself. When I breed my lesser to certain normal females, they look like classic lessers. When I breed him to other normal females the offspring look like classic butters. I suspect that the same thing will happen with the calico vs sugar question.
    Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to MarkS For This Useful Post:

    Lizardlicks (05-28-2015)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1